Sigma 16mm F1.4 DC DN 'C': hands-on and additional details

Hands-on with new Sigma 16mm F1.4 DC DN | Contemporary

Sigma has used the Photo Plus Expo show in New York as a launchpad for an all-new lens – the 16mm F1.4 DC DN | Contemporary is a fast, high-quality prime for cropped-sensor Sony E-mount and M43 cameras.

In person, the new lens is a relatively small, but beautifully well-made prime that fills a useful gap in focal lengths for both systems. On a Sony E-mount APS-C format camera, it is equivalent to 24mm, while on a Micro Four Thirds ILC it becomes an effective 32mm medium-wide.

I found a side-by-side shot of the 30mm 1.4 and 16mm 1.4 on Sigma's site. Going by calculations (as best I could, they show m4/3 and I have Sony, but I tried to account for the difference in flange distance) I've come up with these rough figures:Diameter: 70mm on the focus ringLength, from flat of the lens mount to front of hood:m4/3: 117mmSony E:118mm

The lens hood on the 30mm is a bit deeper, but it's impossible to tell how far into the hood the lens itself goes, so I'm not going to attempt getting the length of the lens without hood.

Agreed. The two Sony offers have crappy IQ. The whole point of mirrorless for many (including me) was size. Canon has their 40mm pancake for their standard mount that's a great lens for a good price. We need some of those for mirrorless.

Maybe you bought into a less balanced mirrorless system. I have a small m43 cam, and with any of my lenses, including my telezoom lens, it is balanced. If you are happy with your DSLR, then no reason to buy a mirrorless. I rarely took my DSLR to anywhere due to its weight, and when I did, it was in my way all the time. But a pocketable compact would have not satisfied me instead.

However, it is true that these new f1.2 lenses are big and heavy, and needed an SLR-like body to get balanced. Still, I think the real advantage of mirrorless system is a small body with small lenses. My goto combo is a Panasonic GF2 with 14mm f2.5 and Olympus 45mm f1.8.

Just curious... why do you care if you are shooting Canon 80D? My A6300 is every bit as good if not better and I shoot it with full frame lenses regularly. Balance is relative to where one holds a camera. I have no issues with it. No one is going to make a pancake 16mm 1.4. Get over it.

Just because small body and lenses is an advantage, doesn't mean it has to be small the entire time. ;)(Also, the sheer framerates that mirrorless cameras are achieving versus DSLRs in the same price range...)

A pancake lens is a natural for any crop-frame camera, especially the small ones. Keeping things small, some will even fit in a large pocket. And they are cheaper to make and cheaper to buy. But the manufacturers can't make much profit selling them.Sony have been negligent in producing new small lenses designed for their APS-C bodies. The last announcement was, I believe, 3 years ago.

Notice to the editors. The comment I am making now is vastly off topic but it’s the only way I know toget your attention. The latest issue of Consumer Reports rates around 20 places where you can prints made from your digital cameras. The top rated place was Walgreens. I think this article would be of interest to your broad membership. Please let me know how in the future I can bring such items to your attention. I am 81 andhsve trouble walking, so I am addicted to reading everything. Thank you for your consideration.

We're all patiently waiting :-) The first one is said to be a 35mm F1.4 that is substantially smaller than the current Zeiss optic. If they are as good as the Tamron lenses (err.. I mean Zeiss Batis lenses) than e-mount users around the world will rejoice!

Which is fine - I use the Canon version of their ART lenses. AF is OK but not great, you are right. So putting this reverse engineering technique into the lens directly would improve AF performance? Remains to be seen.... but I hope you are right. I love their lenses (except for weight and size).

That would be even better... But probably not all lenses would require a specific design for mirrorless cameras... Long lenses like a 85mm or 70-200mm would have "an adapter added into current lenses"... Maybe wide angle lenses would profit from a new design!

I'm jealous, it'll be years before I get to own one :) E-mount must be doing so well it's forcing Canon and Nikon to get into the game, otherwise I can't imagine Sigma taking on such a huge task of making an entirely new line of lenses.

In Addition to optics optimised for the smaller flange distance mirrorless lenses also need different AF motors optimised for contrast or hybrid AF (as opposed to PDAF in DSLRs). So taking a DSLR lens and simply adapting it to a smaller flange distance won’t do.

Nevertheless, I really wonder if Sigma really designs it’s mirrorless lens optics specifically for mirrorless cameras or if they just use DSLR optics and adjust for the different flange distance as all their mirrorless lenses are significantly longer than their DSLR counterparts. Please compare this lens and the Sigma 30 1.4 DN lens to the Fuji counterparts and it is obvious IMHO that comparable lenses (designed for the same sensor size, same aperture) specialised for mirrorless cameras can be much more compact without sacrificing image quality.

Yes, but even DLSR lenses sometimes do not have the rear element so close to the mount... And several Sony mirrorless lenses seem to have an additional ring added to the lens, to adapt the distance to the sensor... It may so be difficult to know whether a lens was optically designed specifically for mirrorless... But for sure, AF motors and electronic should be specific...

i look at big lenses like this on tiny m43 and APS-c MILC and think ..what's the point of having a little slim body and FF size lenses .....remember on FF you only need a F2.8 32mm lens to be comparable to this on m43 and 24mm F2 on APS-c which is probably as small or smaller and differently a lot cheaper and probably better results ...i have yet to see any olympus m43 lens at any price better the bargain basement £$125 canon EF 50mm STM at equivalent f stops when on FF .i have compared £$1000+ m43 lenses

People seem to forget that you can remove these lenses and put on smaller lenses. With FF DSLR, you're always stuck with a big body, no matter what lens you put on it. I used to travel with a Canon 60D (755g). My main camera now is an A6000 (344g) with Sony 16-105/4 G OSS (427g). The 18-105 is bigger and heavier than this Sigma. But the Sony combo is only 16g heavier than the 60D body alone. And of course, I can stick on a much smaller, lighter lens if I want a big drop in size and weight. A 6D body is bigger and heavier than my 60D. I don't miss traveling with my DSLR gear at all.

T3 yes you are correct. small MILC excels if you're out and about with with only a small lens or 2.. i have sony nex(only gets used with 30mm sigma) and canon M /M2 and a SL1/100D for just that .but for the price of 2 fast pro oly lenses at more than 2K you can get a FF 6D and some affordable FF lenses especially as there is a massive stock of secondhand Canikon glass ..and get better results...my 85F1.8 cost £166GBP my 100F2 under£200 all mint my FF equivalent to the sigma 16 is my 35mm F2IS i pay £260 which is a stop faster than the sigma 16mm F1.4(when on m43) BUT WAY smaller at 62mm long vs 92mm so 1/3 smaller ..but you don't have to take out the FF body

@davev8 - First, price is not necessarily the one driving force for everyone. Secondly, a lot of people do prefer to buy new. And thirdly, some people like to just stick with one system, not using a FF DSLR for some things and m4/3 for others, etc. The reality is that there are a lot of options out there, and different people have different preferences. There is not one best solution for everyone. For me, for example, I'm just not interested in DSLRs anymore because I'm tired of big DSLR bodies without EVFs. I'd miss EVF too much. I don't want to go back to having all my AF points clustered only in the center of the viewfinder. 6D with 11 AF points in the center of the viewfinder, no face/eye AF, very poor focus point coverage is just not appealing to me anymore. http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_the_canon_eos_6d/caption_001_new.jpgI've become too accustomed to face/eye AF being able to track my subject all around the viewfinder.

@davev8 one can get a remarkably light (and cheap) combo with the A6x00 bodies using lenses like the Sigma 30mm, 1.9 2.8 lenses as a walkabout pairing: far far lighter than any DSLR, and, dare I say it, far sharper. I also have a A7R with a 24-70 Sony/Zeiss and the whole together with the Sigma lenses and filters weighs less than my Nikon full Frame with a 70-200. Low weight = portability meaning I can go further and faster which at my advancing years is far more important than a catalog of cannon lenses...lastly the Sigma lenses are so much sharper and lighter than any full frame lens I have ever used that I sometimes need to soften images to reduce the visibility of dust and like.

In some ways this lens is wasted on mirrorless users, reading here most complain about the size and weight. If this was in Nikon or Canon mount there would be a gread deal of praise and anticipation of it's release, A lot of crop DSLR users want lenses just like this, for us its not that big or heavy, it's obvious that its mirrorless only otherwise it would have also been released in DSLR mounts where it would have sold like hot cakes.

I hope Sigma forgets how to make small lenses that had mediocre performance. None of us would be here talking about Sigma if they were making the same crappy glass they made 15 years ago. I'll take a big great performing lens over a small poor performing lens any day.

I am confident from looking at the MTF that it will be substantially sharper than the 19/2.8 which is definitely the weakest of the DN lenses (I have them all) though in itself not a bad lens. Personally I have been looking for a 24mm equivalent for ages so this is exactly what I wanted.

I own the Panasonic Leica 15mm f:1.7 for my Lumix G85 and GX8. It's a fantastic lens optically, very versatile, and a lot of fun to work with. As others have noted, it's smaller and lighter than this Sigma monster (for MTF format anyway). This Sigma is almost 3x the length and nearly 4x the weight of my 15mm, and it doesn't focus quite as close either (25cm instead of 20cm) . The extra half-stop of aperture is nowhere near justification for that size and weight difference for MFT, not at any price IMO.

I cashed in all my Nikon and Sigma gear several years ago for MFT-only, because for what I do, there is no IQ difference that matters a damn to me between MFT and either APS-C nor full-frame, and I am no longer interested in struggling with the bulk and weight of those other formats. I'm not everyone, and everyone isn't me, but I think Sigma is nuts if they think they're going to make any dent among MFT users with this lens.

Part of the justification for μ43 was the small size of lenses and bodies enabled by the small format—this lens, and the Olympus f/1.2 primes, make something of a mockery of that original goal. The 15mm and 42.5mm Lumixes are excellent compromises for most folks who like primes.

It is a better fit for one-hand-holding the camera, sure. It is also significantly wider and one stop slower and has three less aperture blades (6 vs 9). You may, in short, as well compare this Sigma to the Canon 400 5.6.

Why not? I travel with a Sony 18-105/4 G OSS on my A6000. The Sony 18-105 is longer and heavier than this lens. I've had no problem with it. At first glance, the 18-105 seems "huge", but it actually feels surprisingly light and comfortable nesting on your left hand while shooting. The Sigma 16/1.4 is lighter and smaller, so I know I'll have no problem with the size of this lens if I get it. But if you really want to go compact and don't need the speed, then obviously there are other lenses that might be a better fit for you.

I prefer to travel light too. That's why I switched to mirrorless. I used to use a Canon 60D, which weighs 755g. The Sony A6000 weighs 344g and the Sony 18-105/4 G OSS weighs 427g. That's a combined weight of 771g, which is only barely more than the weight of my 60D body alone. Of course, with a much lighter and smaller lens, you can go even lower. The tiny Samyang 35/2.8 is only 108g. But for travel, I gotta at least have a zoom.

Like I said, I've traveled extensively with the 18-105/4, which means I've carried it for hours on end, doing all-day shooting with it. Yes, it's surprisingly light. I used to travel with a Canon 60D, which weighs 755g. My A6000 (344g) with Sony 18-105 (427g) combined weighs only 771g-- only 16g heavier than the 60D body alone! So you don't need to be "a strong man" to hold the Sony combo with one hand, because it's only the weight of a 60D body. I also used to travel with a Canon 17-40/4L (500g) on the Canon. That lens was 73g heavier than the Sony 18-105/4 OSS.

To state the obvious the Samyang isn't a 24mm equivalent its 18 and that is a world of difference. The Samyang weighs 310 G with a 67mm diameter (I just weighed mine) and the Sigma 405 grams with 72 mm dia. Does 95 grams and 5 mm more really make it "huge"? Whether its sharper than the very decent Samyang remains to be seen but I am expecting it to be. Its a much more versatile lens that's for sure.

@Jefftan - "But may I ask for the left hand supporting the lens, is that left hand under the camera body and supporting the camera body too?"

It depends on how big the lens is, which effects were the center of gravity of the body/lens combo is. If you have a long lens, they your left hand will be farther away from the camera body, just supporting the lens.

It can be useful under some circumstances. I hiked up Mt. Fuji this August. Most of the hike is at night without artificial lighting--lamps of the hikers excluded. You also don't exactly have the time to set up a tripod, since the group will be pushing you on at all times except when you're desperately trying to rest your feet. I used the 28mm Sigma and cranked up the ISO to 12k. I had the stabilized 1.8 Sony with me too, but being 35mm it was just to long.

Granted, none of those pictures are going to win any competitions or are even remotely good, but it was either that or no pictures of the hike up at all, so I am quite happy to have had that lens with me. Given an opportunity, I would have prefered a wider, faster lens. It's a special case, but those definitely exist.

The one issue I see with this Sigma is that--like my current Sigmas--it is not stabilized, which is kind of a big deal at night.

Sigma has recently started to engineer lens that have larger image circle than is necessary to cover the declared sensor size. This eliminates extreme corners and edges pushing them outside the sensor. Similar to using L glass on crop sensor. This lens will most likely have some aberrations (very fast and wide tend to have) but I have no doubts it will have excellent image quality.

Also worth remembering is that both E and m43 lenses are supposed to be corrected by the camera on normal operation so you might not even notice the aberrations (for example Panasonic 12-35/2.8 has a huge distortion on the wide end but it's automatically corrected and people really like the results. YMMV)

It is 92.3mm (3.6 inches) long and 405g (14 oz) in weight, Big or small? That depends on what you expect. For me, this is a compact and light weight wide angle lens with aspiration-ally high optical performance, something I would appreciate for my E-mount camera.

User, these Sigma prime lenses were all designed for APSC (16mm, 19mm, 30mm and 60mm) and then marketed for M4/3 simply because it is pretty easy to swap lens mounts and sell a few more lenses.

On APSC cameras they make sense because they convert to 24mm, 28mm, 45mm and 90mm. On M4/3 they are still useful, but make less sense at 32mm, 38mm, 60mm and 120mm.

As a M4/3 user, I am glad they exist but I won't be buying any of them. Even though they are really good lenses and very good values, they just aren't the best focal length choices for my M4/3 cameras.

I've had a sony a6000 and there is nothing better than the 30mm f1.4 for it. Bookeh is smooth like butter and it's tack sharp at f5.6, and still quite sharp at f1.4 (plenty for portraits). You have to live with the distortion though (easily corrected in LR).

I'd definitely buy this one as the 19mm f2.8 is not articularly sharp or fast, but that's the best affordable general pupose lens on e-mount. This 16mm could be a brighter replacement for those group shots in a party, low light, etc.. I'd expect this thing will be as sharp as the 30mm, or maybe just a little less because of the wide angle.

It should be a lot of bang for the buck, as is the 30mm, so great for people who are learning photography on sony aps-c.

@Fero,Did you actually shoot the 30/1.4 on your A6000? The one I tried had awful nervous bokeh. This has been attributed to a Sony APS-C problem called 'Onion-Skin Bokeh' in the past. The 30/1.4 only makes beautiful bokeh on M43 bodies, in my experience.

@capturaI've sold it a couple of months ago and now that you mention it there is some "onionness" on some of them. :(I didn't care about it at the time. (As in: I haven't noticed.)I still think it's still a good lens, though. At least the razor-sharp part remains.

I have to note that the onion rings are only apparent with mid- or low-level brightness brilliant light sources, they kinda disappear if these dots are clipped. I guess no surprises there.

Yes, but perhaps not so much a lens problem but a systemic problem Sony has with its's bodies and several other lenses as well. This has been well covered up it seems. But I am way out of my depth with this.All I am saying is this may help to explain the superior bokeh with this lens on M43.

I use the Sony 18-105/4 G OSS which feels surprisingly light and comfortable on my A6000, in spite of its larger size. I've traveled extensively with this combination. This Sigma is lighter and smaller than my 18-105, so I know I'll have no problem with the Sigma on any A6XXX body.

@Jefftan:"I would not use it wide open for anything else than astro photography, but thats just me."for DOF reasons only. I believe that the quality of the lenses is very high and so I dont worry about IQ - that might be optimistic or self-limiting but thast what I do.

@mario loconte The Sony 16mm 21.8 pancake is I am afraid a sorry excuse for a lens. Its simply horrible. The Sigma DN lenses on the A6xxx bodies are an absolute revelation in sharpness, distortion and freedom from vignetting ( a particular issue for the Sony 16 mm)

I wonder if it looks smaller in real life, but on this pictures it looks anything but small.

Anyhow, I would really love to see Sigma introducing the holy trinity of fast zoom lenses (16-35, 24-70 and 70-200 FF equivalent) and add Fuji X-mount and Canon EF-M mount to their portfolio.

The corresponding Fuji zoom lenses are excellent but rather expensive (around 1100 EUR for the 16-55 2.8 and around 1500 EUR for the 50-140 2.8). As well as I know there aren't even any coresponding native lenses with E-mount and EF-M mount.

It's big but I'm not sure I'd call it gigantic, it's just about the size of my PL8-18 or just a little bit bigger than Olympus' f1.2 Pro primes.

Had they brought this out sooner I'd be all over it, cause I've wanted a faster/sealed 35mm-ish equivalent prime for a long time (my 20mm pancake is superb but it's AF quirks make it useless for some things). I'm guessing if it were a dedicated M4/3 design it'd be a bit smaller but it's hard to say how much.

I'm probably getting Oly's 17/1.2 but I'm betting the Sigma will undercut it significantly... The Oly is a little smaller/lighter, uses a smaller filter, and is probably better sealed. The IQ comparisons once they're both out will be really interesting IMO.

This looks like a very interesting addition. Large? The 18-105 is large, so is the Samyang 16/2, both balance rather well with two hands. Astro will probably be done angled up. I know I wouldn't hold the camera and this lens in one hand often and I wouldn't put the camera on a tripod with the lens pointing straight forward either.

Am more interested in bokeh and coma characteristics, I'm sure it will be fairly sharp towards the centre at f/1.4.

I just weighed my Samy 16/2, it is 503g, SLR design (APS-C) so a bit big, especially with the built-in adapter for mirrorless. It's a lovely smooth lady though. I'm a sucker for large aperture wide things for shooting at mfd and this Sigma is a bit magnetic.

The wide angle lens the shots appear to be taken with are exaggerating the size a lot IMO, it's large for a prime but there's already several lenses/primes that size for both systems (not counting huge/long teles either).

Sigma, stop, seriously I can not have so many prime, I still have pending the 30mm 1.4 for my e-mount, there is no place in the bag, I do not have neoprene sleeves, I can not have more lens! Well, maybe a bright zoom, a 18-70 f2.8-4....

There's a few more specs on Sigma's site already as well as DPR's own previous article on the announcement, they probably should've linked that here, and not taken those shots with a lens quite so wide cause it's making the Sigma look far bigger than it is IMO.

Funny, when you're holding the camera and looking down at the lens, it doesn't look/seem so big (nor did it strike me as heavy ... it was probably mounted to the exact same demo A6300). It looks and feels like the 30/1.4's "big brother". Nothing so compact as the 35/1.8, but then again, it's a 16/1.4. It looks huge in the first picture, but in the last, if you imagine taking that lens hood off, it's not that big in the palm of the woman's hand.

I know, I was making an ironic troll troll remark in the name of good humour. and wasn't intending to make the op out to be a troll. think everyone here knows about the trolls or is one. and ironically enough, it'll look normal on a gh5 but look silly on a6000. go figureand, as long as we're not shooting weddings 'image' shouldn't matter :D

The previous 30/1.4 hangs pretty well with the PanaLeica 25/1.4 for half the price, albeit at a somewhat larger size (longer in particular). This one is actually a little larger than the upcoming Oly 17/1.2 but the difference is far smaller than in the case of the 30 vs PL25, course you're comparing f1.4 vs f1.2 at the point but still...

I'm betting if it's priced anywhere near $500 or less it'll sell well amongst M4/3 users, heck even at $800 it's still undercutting the Oly by $400 and M4/3 could use a premium 16-17 with AF. It's now getting two... The 17/1.8 & 20/1.7 are both great but both have some flaws that other primes in the system don't (quirky or useless AF for certain things, or curved focus plane and softness for the price, etc)

Think it'll be out by Christmas? That would actually tempt me to try/get it over the upcoming Oly 17, somehow I'm doubting it when they're still not talking price. I'm betting it'll be way cheaper than the Oly regardless.

I've used the 60/2.8 btw, amazing bargain... I wish Sigma had more of a budget/time to dedicate to M4/3... This one will probably be a good addition to the system given the odd dearth of premium AF 35mm equivalents until now, and sealed to boot.

I wish Sigma or Tamron will make a 55-60 mm f/1.2 PRIME lens so I can buy a Sony A6xxx peacefully. There is a samyang 50mm f/1.2 It's a great lens but 75mm equivalence is bit short for my taste.

I would also like a cheap 24mm f/1.4. Sony's zeiss is expensive and not so great wide open. Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is bit narrow. I would like two primes 35-40mm f/1.4 and 80-90mm f/1.2 to use APS-C. Both should be sharp wide open

The Sigma 16mm F1.4 DC DN Contemporary is an ultra-fast wide-angle prime for Sony APS-C mirrorless cameras. The lens features low-dispersion elements, a nine-blade aperture and weather-sealing, all for under $450.

Latest in-depth reviews

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

No Nikon camera we've tested to date balances stills and video capture as well as the Nikon Z7. Though autofocus is less reliable than the D850, Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless gets enough right to earn our recommendation.

Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. While it's great for lunar and still wildlife photography, we found that it's not suited for much else.

The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

We spoke to wildfire photographer Stuart Palley about his experiences shooting the recent Woolsey fire, why the Nikon Z7 isn't quite ready to take a permanent spot in his gear bag, and 'that' Tweet from Donald Trump.

The Z7 presented Nikon with a stiff challenge: how to build a mirrorless camera that measures up to its own DSLRs and can deliver a familiar experience to Nikon users. Chris and Jordan tell us whether they think Nikon succeeded.

Nikon has released firmware version 1.02 that resolves a flickering issue when scrolling through images, an ISO limitation problem, and an occasional crash that could occur when displaying certain Raw files.

The Insta360 One X is the company's latest consumer 360-degree camera, supporting 5.7K video, including excellent image stabilization, as well as 18MP photos. And, in our experience, it's a really fun camera to use.